Have something to say?

Ready to be published? LXer is read by around 350,000 individuals each month, and is an excellent place for you to publish your ideas, thoughts, reviews, complaints, etc. Do you have something to say to the Linux community?

I believe that most users who can afford such a device are more than happy to over look the bloat you are referring to for the sake of having a slick and productive device on the go. Watching the demo ad, I believe Shuttleworth is on to something. This device OS is a strong contender to any tablet already on the market and specifically the Apple iPad & MS Surface.

Let's wait and see. I think it is more advantageous and in the best interest of FOSS to help than to knock it out so early in the game.

Like it or not, Ubuntu is paving the way for a lot of new Linux users. It may be bloated, but it's slick and polished. There are other options for users wanting a more efficient and familiar interface. No reason to slam Ubuntu over it. Rather, it's my opinion that we should welcome the innovation.

Unity may be "bloated", but it runs very well on my 1 GB RAM (with shared Video RAM) net book. So much so that I can record to Audacity while using Hydrogen to supply the beats.

I've tried XFCE, LXDE, KDE Plasma and Unity on this device, and it's a toss up between LXDE and Unity as to which I like best on this machine.

Here we have Canonical showing the world some real innovation, and people make a fuss about it being bloated.

The convergence thing is not only something very practical, but I personally can't see that it could have come from anywhere but a Free Software company. It's sort of anti control, in that one device does it all, that's not what we would have seen from Apple, I'm sure, where they would have gone for sharing across multiple devices... so as to be able to sell more devices.

Quoting:that is because it is a full desktop that runs on less than 1/4 those system specs (and fast at that)!

@Jeff,

I don't disagree with you, but one desktop doesn't fit all. Tablet users don't really care what hardware and how much it costs as long as it gives them what they like and looking for. Apple products are perfect examples. If Linux is to compete against the cool, it has to be slicker and cooler. I think Canonical is trying and so are the Linux DE teams.

I applaud your effort getting E17 working on RPi and other SOC boards, but you also have to realize that many average users want a lot more than E17 desktop. They want beautiful attractive themes, advanced features, slick and snazzy interfaces. As it is well known, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

It appears to me that people might be missing the point -- this isn't meant to be a "tablet OS", but rather the "multi form-factor interface mode" for a device that is used in several, configured on the fly, "hardware interface" modes. In this paradigm, tne "smart-phone" is also the core of one's tablet and one's "desktop".

One could say that the user is effectively carrying around his Ubuntu "PC" in his pocket as a "smart-phone", and plugging it in to tablet and keyboard and mouse "PC-style" home/office docks as convenient or as necessary to "get real work done"..

Of course, to work well, or even acceptably, this will require heftier core components than a simple tablet or smart-phone would. It has to work well, and smoothly, and carry off an aesthetic feel, as well as a patina of "cool", for Shuttleworth to carry this off.

@Bernard, I don't think so, I think you have nailed it pretty well. This is some real innovation, an innovation I don't think we would have seen from the likes of Apple (although we may yet see them doing something similar, but more locked down), regardless of whether Canonical makes it happen, regardless of whether there is currently hardware with this stuff on it, or phone/tablet apps.

This is what us Science Fiction fans have always dreamed of in our computers.

E17 offers all of these things. It offers a level of themeing that no other desktop does, it offers a level of customization that no other desktop does (hint: click through here they are all E17 -> http://bodhilinux.com/about_dotw.php ), and "snazzy" - well it has compositing with a slew of effects controlled by the active theme.

Have you even spent time using E17? It offers all these things you are claiming are reasons to seek Unity - but again at 1/4 the system resources. And I think you are wrong about not being able to use one desktop for everything. I believe you are right that you can't use the same CONFIGURATION for every desktop, but with the "profiles" E17 offers that let you easily change the entire interface in a single click - yes it can be scaled to use on all devices.

As some history - did you know Ubuntu's first netbook launcher (which lets be honest - this became what unity is today) was written in EFLs? Not sure why they dropped using the light weight libraries in favor of - GTK, but they did. I spent a couple of weeks using Unity to give it a chance... It just doesn't seem to do anything that E17 doesn't. In fact it offers less features while using more resources.

As I said, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it is more than skin deep. Functionality and features are also parts of it.

I don't like Unity and I certainly not defending it, what I was referring to is the effort Shuttleworth is putting into bringing a full fledged unified Linux OS to Desktop/Tablet/Phone devices to offer a productive environment. That is something no other entity but KDE, has been able or wanting to do. MS Surface is a failed hack but I am sure they will try again. Apple and Google so far refuse to do that.

If you think F17 is better and more suitable DE that users will flock to, then do it and compete with Shutleworth and the others and be the hero of FOSS.

You complain about bloat and too much hardware resources, but you tend to ignore the fact that this effort is in its beginning stage. Even worse, you don't appreciate what is being accomplished here. Give it time to develop and mature a bit and then take a whack at it.

Quoting:Have you even spent time using E17?

No, and I haven't because I am very happy and satisfied with KDE 4.x

Quoting:And I think you are wrong about not being able to use one desktop for everything.

Where did I say that? What I always said is different devices are better utilized when each has its own specialized interface not different desktop, like the KDE does with Plasma Desktop, Plasma Netbook, and Plasma Active, which all pretty much share the same basic code and libraries.

@Fettoosh I'm not interdependently wealthy like Mr Shuttle worth. I don't have excess funds to hire an army of programmers. You know what though? I don't have to. Like I said - Samsung - a company that turns profits unlike Ubuntu - is investing themselves in EFL development for Tizen. They are suppose to have things hitting the market this year, so we really will see.

I'm glad to see you don't use Unity, haven't tried E17 and yet are commenting on the state of both desktops. Always nice to see people making judgement/providing opinions who have zero experience on a subject matter.

Quoting:Shuttleworth is putting into bringing a full fledged unified Linux OS to Desktop/Tablet/Phone devices to offer a productive environment. That is something no other entity but KDE, has been able or wanting to do.

That is a comment on EVERY non-KDE desktop. In fact it is a miss informed comment as I stated above. E17 has been offering the ability to change the form factor of it's desktop via "profiles" since before KDE Plasma was even started. So E17 has been "able" to do it for a very long time.

Also - I've never said E17 is best for everyone. I simply state it is flexible enough for a variety of setups/devices/tasks.

Get your facts straight - there is enough miss-information on the internet.

Give me a tablet currently support by a major vendor running ANY Linux desktop EV.

You are side stepping your initial statement at this point. This point was never "you can go to Walmart and buy a computer stock with E17" it was that the flexibility is there and has existed for some time. Something you were clearly oblivious to when you made your blanket statement about KDE Plasma VS all other Linux desktops.

And again - because you seem to not have read my posts - Samsung will be delivering EFL powered Tizen devices at some point in the future.

The Vivaldi effort is hardly a hardware effort by a "major vendor" any more than the Pengpod is. And I am glad they are getting faster hardware - KDE is a also a hog resource wise. While it looks nice it is NOT fitted to be run on low power ARM devices.

If Android was "just another Linux" like Ubuntu or Kubuntu are there wouldn't be such a drive to get a "true" Linux tablet. You know - one that runs X and full applications, not just JavaVMs.

You seem to be presenting all your "points" with no experience and just second hand information.

I've used and bench marked KDE, Unity, and E17 and a number of other desktops. How is that NOT first hand experience? I get that you are trying to be clever and say the same thing I already did - but you are the one being ignorant trying nothing but KDE and still commenting on the state of other things you haven't used.

I love a good debate, but they generally include facts. At this point I feel like I am just feeding a troll "It is better because I said so!". Not "It is better because I've tried all the alternatives and this really surpasses them all."

@Slacker_Mike There are piles of these PCs still alive from decades past. Beyond that there are piles of ARM devices created every day with specs in this range (A10, RPI and others). They are just the easiest to see the speed difference on - but there is a performance difference in how quick the desktop responds with KDE vs LXDE/E17 on powerful hardware even.

You can claim all you want, but the fact is, on my machine that has Atom 330 with 1.6GHz and 2GB, KDE 4.10 runs really really well. In today's standards, it is considered a medium level resource computer. What you don't seem to understand is that, what is bloat to you, which you seem to be obsessed with, might be perfectly OK with someone else. You need to realize that, resources on today's computers are way more than sufficient and mostly not utilized when running KDE multiple times over [virtualization, -:)]. So what is to complain about?

Since I see KDE to be the best desktop that fulfills my requirements and preferences, why on earth do I want to worry about how it performs on 1GHz machine? It is irrelevant to anyone who likes and uses KDE and there are many of them.

Besides, on many occasions, I do mention that KDE is a heavier DE and it is not for slow older computers, but your bloat claims are way too excessive.

On tablets with 1.GHz ARM, the demos I linked to show that they can even handle full fledged KDE decently. But that is not the intention and KDE is being optimized to run better. Vivaldi is for tablet devices since not all features are needed or required.

What difference does it make if one desktop is nanosecond faster than another when it takes a human a few seconds to reach and move a mouse from one side to another? It really is silly to argue about the small difference.

People spend a lot of time at a computer doing their thing, they might as well use what they like and prefer and not get bothered by something they don't enjoy. This is something you don't seem to understand or appreciate. May be it is time to grow your understanding to peoples preference and choice.

I've never once attacked people's choices or their right to choose different things. Choice is one of the best things about FOSS software.

It is just every time I hear people defend Unity or KDE with "modern computers have enough resources that the desktop can use a bunch of them" I recall that when I present Linux as light and fast to Windows advocates I get the same response from them.

Maybe wanting my operating system to boot to sub 128MB of RAM puts me into a minority group - then so be it. But I know there are plenty others out there like me, it is why the projects like E17 and LXDE exist.

Just because my system has a lot of horse power doesn't mean I want that horse power going towards powering the operating system - I want those resource open to be allocated to the applications I use every day.

Just because there are piles of old machines does not automatically equate to KDE being a resource hog. Now if KDE advertised itself as the lightweight desktop that will bring life to machines that were new when Windows ME shipped, then sure they could be accused of being a resource hog, but to my knowledge KDE makes no such claims. KDE appears to be targeting the mainstream desktop users of Windows and OS X.

On my laptop, a 64bit install, KDE 4.84 idles around 400mb of ram which seems to me a very fair trade-off between functionality and performance. Compare that to Windows 7 a desktop that KDE aims to compete with and I find KDE to use less resources, so more bang for the buck.

Just because KDE doesn't idle at 130mb of ram doesn't mean it is bloated or a resource hog. It could mean that E17 and KDE have different goals and objectives.

I run a P4 box w/ .8G RAM. Not exactly smoking hardware. I also use KDE 4. BUT! ....I use fluxbox as my DE and run the KDE 4 apps from FB. Works great. Heck, KDE even runs OK if I disable icantaddy and creepomuk, though not as fast as FB, which doesn't init them at all.

Well, I should say KDE usta work OK. Now, doesn't work at all. Since I rarely ever use the KDE DE, it seems to have rusted shut or something and will no longer boot up. Slack has 6 diff WM/DEs. KDE is the only one that no longer boots. I'd say it still has issues.

Quoting:It is just every time I hear people defend Unity or KDE with "modern computers have enough resources that the desktop can use a bunch of them" I recall that when I present Linux as light and fast to Windows advocates I get the same response from them....

You are using the wrong approach to advocate for and promote FOSS. Windows and Apple users keep using them because of their many features, capabilities and applications available for them. They aren't going to abandon them for Linux just for being lighter and needs less resources. They will go for Linux if it is is comparable and matches everything, features, capabilities, applications, plus more on both but still keeping pretty good performance.
KDE Plasma is doing that and more. Not only on the desktop, but also on Netbooks, tablets, and phones in the future. KDE is simply not just a desktop, but also a suite of applications that work/will work with on all, just like Canonical is doing with Ubuntu.

Quoting:Just because my system has a lot of horse power doesn't mean I want that horse power going towards powering the operating system - I want those resource open to be allocated to the applications I use every day.

When surplus resources are being wasted for not being utilized at all, it might as well be used for whatever else users like to have available in heavier DEs.

There are a lot more KDE users than lighter DE like E17. Look it up on the Internet.

@Fettoosh How on earth do you even know KDE offers more than E17? You've admitted to never having used it!

If you honestly just used the "KDE is more popular, so it must be better" line... At that rate we all better just go use Windows or OSX - they are after all far more popular than Linux as a whole - regardless of desktop.

You are putting words in my mouth, what I said is KDE does more than Apple and Windows, didn't include E17. Besides, I don't have to use a DE to know much about it, All I need to read is its own release feature list.

No one ever claimed that KDE is light weight either. KDE developers know and well aware of that fact and it is the reason why they have a different interface and compilation for each type of hardware configuration: KDE Plasma Desktops, Netbook Plasma for Netbooks, and Plasma Active for tablets and possibly phones.

Quoting:That fact doesn't make KDE and more light weight - which was my only point.

I think if you would have made that statement rather than KDE is a resource hog I would have less of a problem with it. Resource hog implies that KDE isn't suited to or performing well on the devices it targets, which to me seems untrue. I still maintain that KDE does more for a user with the 400mb of ram it uses than other desktops, therefore it accomplishes the goal rather nicely. None of this means it is lightweight or going to boot to 128mb ram at idle, again not it's goal.

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]